Skip to main content
5:00 pm
5:01 pm
5:02 pm
5:03 pm
5:04 pm
5:05 pm
5:06 pm
5:07 pm
5:08 pm
5:09 pm
5:10 pm
[gavel] president peterson: good evening, and welcome to the september, 2008, meeting of the board of appeals. presiding is vice president kendall goh, frank fung, michael garcia, and chris hwang. president peterson is not here tonight. i mdc give director of the board. we also have secretary pacheco. laurence kornfield is here, and
5:11 pm
we have representatives from the planning commission and the zoning administrator, and also city in the front is carla short, émcurban forester, representing the forestry. >gwe will conduct the swearing n process and go over the meeting guidelines. secretary pacheco: the board requested that you turn off any beepers or pagers and carry on conversations in the hallway. ñ present cases and three minutes for rebuttal. people affiliated with these parties must include their comments within the seven or three-minute period, and those not affiliated half of the to three minutes each to address the board but no rebuttals.
5:12 pm
to assist the board and the actress presentation of minutes, members who wish to speak on an item are asked but not required to submit a speaker card or business card to board staff ~ikbkgmt;:1é! the left side of the podium. the board also welcomes your comments and suggestions. there are satisfaction survey forms on the left side of the podium, as well. pbñiç having a rehearing or about board rules, please talk to someone during the break or call in the morning. room 304. this meeting is broadcast live on san francisco cable television channel 78, sfgtv, and the broadcast is available for purchase directly from sfgtv. thank you for your attention. at this point, we intend to
5:13 pm
conduct our swearing in. if you plan to testify, please stand, raise your hand, and say "i do" it to be affirmed. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? thank you. commissioner hwang: no. 5, a chinatown restaurant against the department of public works -- public health has requested more time to finalize a settlement agreement. with your vote, we can move this to the october 6, 2010, agenda, and, perhaps, it may be done by then. vice president goh: so moved. commissioner hwang: mr. pacheco,
5:14 pm
could you read that? secretary pacheco: [reading role] thank you. the vote is 4-0, and that is rescheduled to october 6. commissioner hwang: and then a rehearing request of the sunflower spa, the appellate has requested that this matter be rescheduled to september 15, 2010, and the department of public health has agreed korea that. commissioner garcia: is that an overly heavy night that night? i would certainly move that. commissioner hwang: is there any public comment? ok, seeing none, then, mr.
5:15 pm
pacheco, if you could call that. secretary pacheco: of the motion to reschedule this -- [reading role] thank you. the vote is 4-0. that is rescheduled to september 15. commissioner hwang: thank you. we will go back to item number one, and if there is anyone who would like to speak on an item that is not on tonight's agenda, please step forward. >> members of the commission, with the san francisco open government. i am here to talk about the case of a reconsideration was brought before this board, and this is a concern regarding the entire process that led up to that. the very first thing i would
5:16 pm
like to talk about is the fact that even though some members of the board did mention that there were questioning and due process, the decision of the board was based on the fact that nothing new was presented. however, there seems to be almost a willful blindness to the fact that maybe the lack of new evidence was the basis that some with information was withheld by the department of building, and, basically, if you really wanted to know what happened, you have to go to the sunshine ordinance task force. there was the senior planner in the matter, after being told by the sunshine organization that there were certain documents that he had to produce, he certainly -- he simply set out in the hall he would not produce them. i think this raises serious questions as to whether or not they did what they needed to do
5:17 pm
to keep this case from being heard. now, i have to be honest with you. the failure to reconsider was based on one or two members of the commission and the fact that they did not like the fact that they were being challenged. i think the rest of the matter of qualifications is a legitimate issue raised. it is a matter of law that people who sit on the board of appeals may develop certain qualifications, knowledge of the business code, and so forth, so they can have an understanding. i think this is critically important, because if you do not have a basic knowledge of the building code and the requirements and so forth, you are left in one position, that of lying -- relying completely on the recommendations of the city. they were not forthright. they gave this immense amounts of grief. none of that has been resolved.
5:18 pm
looking the other way and moving on the thing speaks less of you than a dozen of them. very frankly, a commissioner who does not have the qualifications to sit on the board and take exception to that, harry truman had a freeze for that. if you cannot stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. i think basically, you cannot have a basic understanding of those underlying laws on which these cases are imbedded, you're basically a rubber-stamp for what the department recommends, and i do not think that any of you intend to be that way or should be allowed to be that way. commissioner hwang: anymore public comments? seeing none -- commissioner garcia: that issue
5:19 pm
keeps coming up about who is qualified to be on this board. could you give a brief exposition as to who is qualified? commissioner hwang: i can provide certain information. there is also a reference to certain building code requirements which actually do not have to do with the board of appeals, but the requirements for sitting on the boards are in the charter, and i would be happy to speak to him or whoever else who would like to have more information about those requirements. >> -- commissioner garcia: but everyone who is sitting on the sport is qualified by the charter to sit on this board? commissioner hwang: i certainly feel that way myself, and they could read the charter, but, yes. >> can i get -- commissioner garcia: can i hear from the
5:20 pm
attorney on that? >> under public comment, that would not be a good time, but, yes, i can. if you would like. commissioner garcia: it seems to me that it is left hanging in the public that there could be people who are not qualified, and i thought we could deal with that, but if we cannot, then i guess we have to put it on the agenda. >> there were some references to the building code provisions that i hoped were qualified when people have come to me to explain that the building code provisions do not relate to the board of appeals members, and i would happy to work with him on that, as well. but that has been done already with other members of the public. commissioner garcia: all right, however you choose to deal with
5:21 pm
it. vice president goh: well, with the minutes that we are about to do, commissioner garcia did ask to have that placed on the agenda, so maybe we can have that on the future calendar. providing an opinion on the matter. commissioner hwang: 80. all right, so is there any other public, under item number one? then we will move on to item number two. seeing none, we will move on to item number three. the adoption of minutes. commissioners, what is before you is adoption of the medical costs from the meeting of august 18, 2010. vice president goh: if there is no comment, i will move to adopt the minutes.
5:22 pm
commissioner hwang: mr. pacheco? secretary pacheco: on the motion from the board's president to adopt the minutes, -- the vote -- the board's vice president to adopt the minutes, [reading role] item number six, jennifer salerno, meridian management group, against the department of public works, involving it a tree -- involving a tree. commissioner hwang: we always
5:23 pm
start with the department. ms. short? >> good evening. carla short. we approved three. tonight's concern is about the denial of the four remaining trees. two of these are one species, and two are another kind. that is a red flower when regionflo -- that is a red flowering gum. this will still allow the repair of the sidewalk, four feet for the pubs of trouble. so the decision was recommended that the property owner could contact us when they begin to
5:24 pm
undertake these sidewalk repairs, and the bad points in time, based on the route structure, we did not believe that we would grant an emergency removal permits, so we have wa to the condition of the trees, and it is based on the condition of the trees and, of course, public safety. if we think it can be repaired, we will deny the removal of the trees and recommend moving forward with that. there is a little discretion if we did the feel of that time that they were more significant than we were led to believe from what we could see. as you know, our mandate from the urban forestry is written to protect and enhance the urban forests, which means when we
5:25 pm
have matured trees that can be preserved with an eye towards protecting public safety and when the trees do not have structural flaws, then we do seek to preserve those trees, and the benefits are greater than those small trees, and the mortality rate is much higher for younger trees, so that is sort of the logic behind our decision. i would like to submitted this, copy of the director's order from our department to hearing as well as copies of our staff evaluation, which, i think, just backs up the decision making that we had in this case, and i gave ms. salerno a copy, too.
5:26 pm
commissioner garcia: not to jump ahead of the appellant, but the third bullet point addresses the fact that it does not make sense to require the owner to fix the sidewalk when it is going to just buckle again. not to lead you, but i am assuming that once the base is widened, somehow these words could be pruned in such a way that it would be unlikely that the sidewalk would buckle again? >> it is very difficult to see -- say how they would react, but we do know from past experience when given a wider area, many times, the roots will take the vantage rather than pushing up the sidewalk. they tended to be opportunistic
5:27 pm
and that way. we hope that will reduce the likelihood of future buckling, but we cannot guarantee that. commissioner garcia: because you can see how that would be pre- frustration for a homeowner to repair the sidewalk and just fear that it will happen again? >> sure. commissioner garcia: ok. commissioner fung: ms. short, are these the city installed and maintained trees, or are they -- >> these are probably maintained trees. years and years ago, the city may have planted trees through various tree planting initiatives, but if they are not on the dw list then -- commissioner fung: so these are probably maintained? >> these are probably maintains.
5:28 pm
-- privately maintained. commissioner fung: do you have an age? >> no, we do not have an age. commissioner fung: their life span? >> they have a pretty substantial trunk diameter, but i do not like to guess the age of trees, because as i have said in the past, they be made differently in urban conditions than in their natural landscape conditions, but given the vigor and the health of the trees that we're seeing, we would expect that they would live for many more years. commissioner fung: do you have a photo? >> i do. commissioner hwang: thank you. >> so this is the second one.
5:29 pm
commissioner fung: these are the ones being requested to be removed? >> yes. this is the first tree on church street. these are the two of that one species. vice president goh: so is those ones that were approved for removal? >> no. vice president goh: so the three that you're showing us are the ones that have been denied. commissioner hwang: that was the new zealand christmas tree? >> yes. commissioner hwang: has been removed to treat been replaced? >> that was a condition of the >> that was a condition of the order.

September 8, 2010 4:00pm-4:30pm PST

TOPIC FREQUENCY Hwang 14, Garcia 10, Pacheco 5, Mr. Pacheco 3, Peterson 2, Sfgtv 1, Meridian 1, Spa 1, San Francisco 1, Chinatown 1, The City 1, Korea 1, Mdc 1, Michael Garcia 1, Jennifer Salerno 1, Harry Truman 1, Frank Fung 1, Ms. Salerno 1, Carla 1, Chris Hwang 1
Network SFGTV2
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 89 (615 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 544
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color